Technology use and attitudes among individuals with mild cognitive impairment and their care partners

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundDuring the COVID‐19 pandemic, the shift toward telehealth has drastically increased providers’ need to quickly gauge patient comfort with various technologies, especially for older individuals exhibiting cognitive impairments. Existing measures require significant training for administration and scoring, and do not include many technologies in use by older adults (e.g., social media or common smart phone applications). The present study aimed to adapt the Everyday Technology Use Questionnaire (ETUQ) to be self‐administered by individuals with MCI and their Care Partners.MethodTwelve older adults with MCI (Mean Age= 74.1, SD= 8.4) and 10 Care Partners (Mean Age= 69.0, SD= 8.2) completed the 28‐item ETUQ and a Technology Attitudes Questionnaire (TAQ). The adapted ETUQ lists different technologies (e.g., television, smart phone, ride share apps). Participants were asked to rate their comfort using these technologies on a scale from 1 to 6, with higher ratings indicating greater comfort.ResultTotal scores in the MCI group ranged from 72 to 168 (Mean= 129.3, SD= 31.2) and in the Care Partners ranged from 137 to 162 (Mean= 149.2, SD=9.9). Independent samples t‐tests revealed a trend in ETUQ scores, wherein individuals with MCI reported lower overall comfort with technologies than care partners, t(13.6)= ‐2.09, p = .056. This represented a large effect size, d= 0.83. Items rated lower by individuals with MCI included: ride share apps (Lyft or Uber), Fitbit or activity trackers, social media (e.g., Facebook), Skype or video call, and WIFI routers. Analyses revealed no significant differences in age, attitudes toward technology or dependence on technology between groups.ConclusionThese results support the use of an adapted ETUQ for individuals with MCI and their care partners. Interestingly, these ratings suggest individuals with MCI feel less comfortable with complex technology than their care partners, possibly reflecting cognitive difficulties. Future directions include validation of the adapted ETUQ and correlation to real‐world behaviors through in‐home monitoring.